From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1750919AbdBBCCn (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 1 Feb 2017 21:02:43 -0500
Received: from mail-pf0-f193.google.com ([209.85.192.193]:34778 "EHLO
        mail-pf0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750726AbdBBCCl (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 1 Feb 2017 21:02:41 -0500
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 11:02:57 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 5/8] printk: report lost messages in printk safe/nmi
 contexts
Message-ID: <20170202020257.GB1954@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
References: <20161227141611.940-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20161227141611.940-6-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20170201113700.5b464143@gandalf.local.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170201113700.5b464143@gandalf.local.home>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On (02/01/17 11:37), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> This looks fine, but I'm curious if you tested it. That is, added a
> bunch of printks to overflow the buffer. IIRC, I did it to the original
> nmi code. If you haven't you may want to just to make sure it works. I
> can also test it too if I get some time.

Hello Steven,

yes, I have tested it on my x86 box.

	-ss